The Governance Mismatch
October 23, 2017

Mark Schwartz
Amazon Web Services

DevOps poses a unique challenge and opportunity for IT governance. Traditionally we have governed IT in terms of projects. We lump a number of requirements, fulfilling a number of business needs, together into a bundle we call a project. We then build a business case for that project, put it through some governance process, perhaps an IT steering committee or some variation on one, to decide whether to allow it to proceed and to give it a place in the company's priorities. Once the project is ongoing, the team conducting it reports on its progress against its objectives, and probably against its planned costs and schedule, and some sort of oversight mechanism is in place to review, and perhaps act on, those results. You could say that our unit of governance is the "project," or that we govern at the granularity of the project. The project is a grouping of requirements, a thing that can be planned, an initiative that begins and ends.

Of course project-oriented governance lends itself to the Waterfall model. A fixed set of requirements; a plan; a Gantt chart; a well-defined series of phases; a result at the end – this is a natural way to treat a conglomeration of requirements that has an approved business case and a committed plan.

DevOps offers us a very different manner of execution. It is flow based, with new requirements being pulled into a pipeline, worked on, and deployed quickly to users: it optimizes the lead time for getting requirements into production by automating the delivery process and by eliminating handoffs between functional silos. Each individual requirement travels its own path to production, as if it were a packet making its way across the Internet. Our unit of execution is the individual user story or task, and with very frequent deployments, DevOps can reach single piece flow.

So we find ourselves in a position where we are governing at the project level yet executing at the individual requirement level – a somewhat disturbing mismatch. The consequence is that we are forced to hold requirements in inventory, so to speak, or plan in large batches of requirements.

In order to make a business case and present an adequately sized business proposal to the steering committee, we still need to assemble a large batch of requirements. In order to report on the status of – what? – something that can have a status, I suppose, we still report on the status of projects. We forego, in other words, the full benefits of DevOps – the ability to work leanly by reducing our batch size.

But how else can we govern? What exactly can a steering committee greenlight, and how does it know how that thing is progressing?

I'd like to suggest that the answer is simple and staring us in the face. Or rather, answers, because I believe there are two approaches. The first is to govern by business objectives. We determine a business objective that will have concrete business outcomes, preferably measurable ones. Then we make a business case – formal or informal – that therobjective is worth investing a particular amount of money in. If we decide that it is, we hand the objective to an empowered team and ask them to start accomplishing it – immediately. Because we are in a DevOps world, they should be able to begin deploying functionality virtually right away. We observe the business results they achieve, determine whether they are worth continued investment, and adjust our plans.

The second alternative is to govern IT investment the way we govern the rest of our company – without a governance process. The IT organization is allocated a budget and expected to make good decisions on how to spend it to accomplish the company's objectives. It is assessed and guided like any other part of the company – let's say that the CEO evaluates the CIO's performance and gives feedback to steer IT's direction. What is evaluated is the business outcome of the IT organization's decisions. The advantage of this approach is that it allows for continual transformation, continuous investments in systems, rather than the periodic, on-again-off-again flow of investment when we organize around projects.

It's one thing to reap operational advantages from DevOps. It is a different thing to maximize the value that DevOps can deliver to the enterprise, strategically as well as tactically. For that, we need to rethink governance.

Mark Schwartz, Enterprise Strategist at Amazon Web Services (AWS), is the Author of "A Seat at the Table"
Share this

Industry News

February 13, 2025

LaunchDarkly announced the private preview of Warehouse Native Experimentation, its Snowflake Native App, to offer Data Warehouse Native Experimentation.

February 13, 2025

SingleStore announced the launch of SingleStore Flow, a no-code solution designed to greatly simplify data migration and Change Data Capture (CDC).

February 13, 2025

ActiveState launched its Vulnerability Management as a Service (VMaas) offering to help organizations manage open source and accelerate secure software delivery.

February 12, 2025

Genkit for Node.js is now at version 1.0 and ready for production use.

February 12, 2025

JFrog signed a strategic collaboration agreement (SCA) with Amazon Web Services (AWS).

February 12, 2025

mabl launched of two new innovations, mabl Tools for Playwright and mabl GenAI Test Creation, expanding testing capabilities beyond the bounds of traditional QA teams.

February 11, 2025

Check Point® Software Technologies Ltd. announced a strategic partnership with leading cloud security provider Wiz to address the growing challenges enterprises face securing hybrid cloud environments.

February 11, 2025

Jitterbit announced its latest AI-infused capabilities within the Harmony platform, advancing AI from low-code development to natural language processing (NLP).

February 11, 2025

Rancher Government Solutions (RGS) and Sequoia Holdings announced a strategic partnership to enhance software supply chain security, classified workload deployments, and Kubernetes management for the Department of Defense (DOD), Intelligence Community (IC), and federal civilian agencies.

February 10, 2025

Harness and Traceable have entered into a definitive merger agreement, creating an advanced AI-native DevSecOps platform.

February 10, 2025

Endor Labs announced a partnership with GitHub that makes it easier than ever for application security teams and developers to accurately identify and remediate the most serious security vulnerabilities—all without leaving GitHub.

February 07, 2025

Are you using OpenTelemetry? Are you planning to use it? Click here to take the OpenTelemetry survey.

February 06, 2025

GitHub announced a wave of new features and enhancements to GitHub Copilot to streamline coding tasks based on an organization’s specific ways of working.

February 06, 2025

Mirantis launched k0rdent, an open-source Distributed Container Management Environment (DCME) that provides a single control point for cloud native applications – on-premises, on public clouds, at the edge – on any infrastructure, anywhere.

February 06, 2025

Hitachi Vantara announced a new co-engineered solution with Cisco designed for Red Hat OpenShift, a hybrid cloud application platform powered by Kubernetes.